Throne of Satan

[Douggg]

1- Seventy week prophecy of Daniel where most Christians subscribe to the removal of the last week and moving it to the end of time. In so doing this they attribute the last week to the antichrist. No where in the Bible is there another example of a gap in time prophecy or any persons interpretation of a time prophecy. This Gap stands alone in mans interpretation.

OHC, there is no gap between Jesus's first coming and Jesus's Second Coming ?

We agree that the 69th week ended with the anointing of the Messiah when he was baptized by John.

I am sorry, but that is not what I believe. The 69th week ended when Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the donkey, hailed by his followers as the messiah. Four days later, he was crucified.

2- Understanding that Israel in the new testament is not the literal Israel but the Spiritual Israel that Gentiles are grafted into. The promises made to literal Israel were transferred to the spiritual Israel at the close of the prophecy. This issue would go away if the 70th week was properly understood.

Then what do you do with the parable of the fig tree in Matthew 24 ?

 

[Original Happy Camper]

OHC, there is no gap between Jesus's first coming and Jesus's Second Coming ?

I am sorry, but that is not what I believe. The 69th week ended when Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the donkey, hailed by his followers as the messiah. Four days later, he was crucified.


Then what do you do with the parable of the fig tree in Matthew 24 ?

First statement. Have I misunderstood your postings in that you do not believe in the 70th week being at the end of time?

Please explain you statement of no gap between the first coming and the second coming. My feeble mind does not understand this statement.

Then we can move on to the second and third statements you posted.

 

[parousia70]

Look at the identification characteristics of both, they are the same.

OK, lets test that theory, and examine the Bible's teachings on the Characteristics of Antichrist, shall we?

The only mentions anywhere in scripture pertaining to what antichrist is, can be found here: 2 John 1:7; 1 John 2:18-19; 1 John 4:1-3 and 1 John 2:22-23. That's everything. Taken together, these verses show that antichrist involved the following essential characteristics:

#1 -- The denial that Christ came in true human flesh (2 John 1:7; 1John 4:2-3). The true Christians said his coming was incarnational and these false brothers claimed his coming was not in flesh.

#2 -- The claim that one could have Jehovah without having Jesus (1 John 2:22-23; cf. also with John 15:23-24 and John 5:22-23).

That's it. That's the entire biblical teaching on the subject.

To add in other non-biblical concepts is to make the bible teach what it does not teach. Antichrist cannot mean something other than what it meant to the original writers of the Bible, and we know exactly what it was from their inspired testimony.

But, I'll be happy to listen to your reasoning. Go ahead and show us where the Bible teaches this is the same thing as "the Little Horn".

 

[Revealing Times]

OHC, there is no gap between Jesus's first coming and Jesus's Second Coming ?

There is a Seven year period between the Rapture and when Jesus comes back to Rule on earth and defeat the Anti-Christ, you can call it whatever you want, doesn't really matter to me, but that is the facts.

I am sorry, but that is not what I believe. The 69th week ended when Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the donkey, hailed by his followers as the messiah. Four days later, he was crucified.

The Bible says he was CUT OFF after 69 weeks, so we still have a 70th week.

 

[Revealing Times]

The only mentions anywhere in scripture pertaining to what antichrist is, can be found here: 2 John 1:7; 1 John 2:18-19; 1 John 4:1-3 and 1 John 2:22-23. That's everything. Taken together, these verses show that antichrist involved the following essential characteristics:

No, there are many places that speak about this MAN OF SIN..........Little Horn etc. etc. Names mean nothing.

 

[Douggg]

First statement. Have I misunderstood your postings in that you do not believe in the 70th week being at the end of time?

Please explain you statement of no gap between the first coming and the second coming. My feeble mind does not understand this statement.

Then we can move on to the second and third statements you posted.

Yes, I believe the 70th week is at the end of time. It begins when the person who becomes the Antichrist confirms the Mt. Sinai covenant for 7 years by overseeing the reading of the law (the law of Moses, another name for the Mt. Sinai covenant) for the 7 years required in Deuteronomy 31:9-13 for all future generations to confirm that covenant.

My comment of there being no gap between the first coming and the second coming was in a form of a question to you - since you said the gap is man-made. It was to get you to think.

There is a gap between the 69th week and the 70th week, the same gap between the first and second comings. The 70th week and second half of the 70th is the basis for the structure of the chapters in Revelation 6-16.

There is the similar gap in Daniel 2, Daniel 7, Daniel 8, Daniel 9, Daniel 11.

Also there is a 7 year gap in Ezekiel 39 between the two feasts - the one in Ezekiel 39:4 on Gog's army, and the second feast in Ezekiel 39:17-20 which is the Armageddon feast.
____________________________________________________________
btw, you did not respond, that if Israel is no longer valid and has been replaced by the church - then how do you handle the parable of the fig tree in Matthew 24?

To cut to the chase, the fig tree is Jerusalem, which because it came back in the hands of the Jews in 1967, that generation will not pass away until all of the prophecies are fulfilled including Jesus's Return to this earth.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

OK, lets test that theory, and examine the Bible's teachings on the Characteristics of Antichrist, shall we?

The only mentions anywhere in scripture pertaining to what antichrist is, can be found here: 2 John 1:7; 1 John 2:18-19; 1 John 4:1-3 and 1 John 2:22-23. That's everything. Taken together, these verses show that antichrist involved the following essential characteristics:

#1 -- The denial that Christ came in true human flesh (2 John 1:7; 1John 4:2-3). The true Christians said his coming was incarnational and these false brothers claimed his coming was not in flesh.

#2 -- The claim that one could have Jehovah without having Jesus (1 John 2:22-23; cf. also with John 15:23-24 and John 5:22-23).

That's it. That's the entire biblical teaching on the subject.

To add in other non-biblical concepts is to make the bible teach what it does not teach. Antichrist cannot mean something other than what it meant to the original writers of the Bible, and we know exactly what it was from their inspired testimony.

But, I'll be happy to listen to your reasoning. Go ahead and show us where the Bible teaches this is the same thing as "the Little Horn".

Antichrist
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In Christianity, the Antichrist (Greek: αντίχριστος, translit. antichristos; Hebrew: אנטיכריסט‎‎) or False Messiah (Greek: ψευδός Μεσσίας, translit. psevdós Messías; Hebrew: משיח שקר‎‎) is generally regarded as a figure of evil that will falsely claim to be the Christ (Messiah). The term Antichrist is found in the New Testament five times in 1 John and 2 John, once in plural form[1] and four times in the singular.[2]

See Post #4 in this thread for the characteristics of the antichrist.

The New York Catholic Catechism, under: Pope, says, "The Pope takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth...by divine right the pope has supreme and full power ..."

You are continuing the counter reformation which will last till the second coming of Christ. By the teachings of Jesuit Ribera most Protestant Christians have succumb to that teaching some of us have not.

And the reformation continues.

Revelation 18:4
And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

Ever wonder who "HER" refers to?

 

[Douggg]

There is a Seven year period between the Rapture and when Jesus comes back to Rule on earth and defeat the Anti-Christ, you can call it whatever you want, doesn't really matter to me, but that is the facts.

What? The seven years begin on the same day of the rapture, in your view?

 

[parousia70]

No, there are many places that speak about this MAN OF SIN..........Little Horn etc. etc.

Yes Scripture speaks of the Man of Sin, Little Horn, Beast etc.... I'm asking where scripture teaches that these entities are:
1) The same individual
2) Biblically Identified as antichrist

Names mean nothing.

You sure about that?

For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Romans 10:13

 

[parousia70]

Antichrist
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia...

So, you have no scripture? Just wikipedia?

 

[Original Happy Camper]

Yes, I believe the 70th week is at the end of time. It begins when the person who becomes the Antichrist confirms the Mt. Sinai covenant for 7 years by overseeing the reading of the law (the law of Moses, another name for the Mt. Sinai covenant) for the 7 years required in Deuteronomy 31:9-13 for all future generations to confirm that covenant.

My comment of there being no gap between the first coming and the second coming was in a form of a question to you - since you said the gap is man-made. It was to get you to think.

There is a gap between the 69th week and the 70th week, the same gap between the first and second comings. The 70th week and second half of the 70th is the basis for the structure of the chapters in Revelation 6-16.

Referencing the Gap in Daniels prophecy, using this Bible verse,
Isaiah 28:10
For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line,
line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

Please show specific scripture supporting the gap in the time prophecy.

 

[Original Happy Camper]

So, you have no scripture? Just wikipedia?

Straw man

Read the rest of the post

 

[parousia70]

Revelation 18:4
And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.

Ever wonder who "HER" refers to?

Nope. Scripture tells us exactly who "she" is.

She is "The Great City... Where our Lord was Crucified" Revelation 11:8
You do know where our lord was crucified, yes?

 

[parousia70]

Straw man

Read the rest of the post

Again, devoid of ANY scripture pertaining to antichrist...
Why do you teach what scripture does not?

 

[parousia70]

See Post #4 in this thread for the characteristics of the antichrist.

I believe you meant post #3?

You are wrong about the antichrist being Islamic. There are thirteen identifying marks as to who the antchrist (little horn)is in the Bible you would do well to educate yourself on what the Bible says instead of going off into left field.

1. It arose out of the fourth beast.
2. It came up among the ten horns.
3. It came up after the ten horns had been established.
4. It was to uproot three horns.
5. It was to be greater than the others.
6. It was to be different than the others.
7. It was to have eyes like the eyes of a man and speak great words against God.
8. It was to make war on God's saints.
9. It would think to change times and laws.
10.The saints were to be handed over to it for a time and times and half a time.
11. It shall devour the whole earth.
12. It shall reign until the Ancient of Days comes.
13. Its dominion will be taken away.

Identifying the Antichrist | Prophecy of Daniel | Religious and Political System

NONE of these 13 characteristics say ANYTHING about "antichrist" or link to ANY scriptural teaching on what antichrist is.

Again, why do you teach what scripture does not?

You see, Your challenge is in the fact the bible teaches no such thing about antichrist as you claim.

In the scriptures that ACTUALLY, EXPLICITLY teach about antichrist, there is not one thing to indicate it is speaking of a future to us singular human leader.

What it does teach is that antichrist was a then present 1st century Church Heresy that affected many and was proof to John that the Last Hour of the Last Days had come upon Him and his 1st century contemporaries.

I'll post the ENTIRE Biblical teaching on antichrist. Perhaps you can show us where in these 4 passages it teaches antichrist is rightfully, SCRIPTURALLY connected to ANY of your 13 "characteristics above?

1 John 2:18
Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.

1 John 2:22
Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son.

1 John 4:3
and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.

2 John 1:7
For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

That's it. That is EVERYTHING the Bible has to say about antichrist.

Any interpretation that goes outside of this explicit, direct teaching, is based only on human tradition, speculation and assumption, and is not grounded on or found anywhere in scripture.

 

[Douggg]

Referencing the Gap in Daniels prophecy, using this Bible verse,
Isaiah 28:10
For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line,
line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

Please show specific scripture supporting the gap in the time prophecy.

In Matthew 24:6-15, Jesus said the gospel of the kingdom will be spread to the entire world. Then the end will come, which he specifically references the Abomination of Desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel. The spreading of the gospel is the gap - because the Abomination of Desolation is end times, in the text of Daniel 12:4.

 

[Douggg]

That's it. That is EVERYTHING the Bible has to say about antichrist.

Any interpretation that goes outside of this explicit, direct teaching, is based only on human tradition, speculation and assumption, and is not grounded on or found anywhere in scripture.

What you are not getting is that what is in the epistles of John, is based upon what is found in the gospel of John 5, which contains the Father/Son relationship. And in John 5, Jesus said he came in his Father's name and the Jews refused him, but another coming in his own name they would receive - Jesus was referring to the Antichrist.... someone the Jews will receive as their King of Israel, instead of Jesus the rightful King. God is the rightful King of Israel.

It goes back to the day of Saul, when Israel demanded a man-king instead of God as their King. 1Samuel12:12. God is the rightful King of Israel, who the Lord Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh.

12 And when ye saw that Nahash the king of the children of Ammon came against you, ye said unto me, Nay; but a king shall reign over us: when the LORD your God was your king.

parousia70, you have to understand the background to know what is going on........uh, I am not doing one of these ......just saying, okay?

 

[2X4]

I believe you meant post #3?


NONE of these 13 characteristics say ANYTHING about "antichrist" or link to ANY scriptural teaching on what antichrist is.

Again, why do you teach what scripture does not?

You see, Your challenge is in the fact the bible teaches no such thing about antichrist as you claim.

In the scriptures that ACTUALLY, EXPLICITLY teach about antichrist, there is not one thing to indicate it is speaking of a future to us singular human leader.

What it does teach is that antichrist was a then present 1st century Church Heresy that affected many and was proof to John that the Last Hour of the Last Days had come upon Him and his 1st century contemporaries.

I'll post the ENTIRE Biblical teaching on antichrist. Perhaps you can show us where in these 4 passages it teaches antichrist is rightfully, SCRIPTURALLY connected to ANY of your 13 "characteristics above?

1 John 2:18
Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.

1 John 2:22
Who is a liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist who denies the Father and the Son.

1 John 4:3
and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world.

2 John 1:7
For many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not confess Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

That's it. That is EVERYTHING the Bible has to say about antichrist.

Any interpretation that goes outside of this explicit, direct teaching, is based only on human tradition, speculation and assumption, and is not grounded on or found anywhere in scripture.

There is a lot of knowledge about the antichrist and the beast that the antichrist left out of the New Testament writings. Why would the antichrist want that knowledge from Christ in their New Testament about them stealing the Gospel words from God's servants and mixing them with their old Jewish traditions like water baptism and the Roman Catholic Eucharist pagan ideas? Why would they include anything about the Beast that has human beings build false gods with their human hands?

 

[parousia70]

There is a lot of knowledge about the antichrist and the beast that the antichrist left out of the New Testament writings.

Wait, what?
antichrist wrote the New Testament?

 

[parousia70]

What you are not getting is that what is in the epistles of John, is based upon what is found in the gospel of John 5, which contains the Father/Son relationship. And in John 5, Jesus said he came in his Father's name and the Jews refused him, but another coming in his own name they would receive - Jesus was referring to the Antichrist.... someone the Jews will receive as their King of Israel, instead of Jesus the rightful King. God is the rightful King of Israel.

You are speculating.
I Bolded the speculation.

Again NOWHERE in the teaching on antichrist does John teach that antichrist was/is someone the Jews would receive as King.

That is purely man made.